The NFL Network usually has a segment on Wednesdays (I think it's Wednesday, anyway) with Mike Pereira, head of NFL officiating. In this segment, he discusses questionable calls from the prior Sunday. Did anyone catch this week's? And did he discuss Owen Daniels' catch/non-catch? TIA.

real

11-16-2006, 01:43 PM

The NFL Network usually has a segment on Wednesdays (I think it's Wednesday, anyway) with Mike Pereira, head of NFL officiating. In this segment, he discusses questionable calls from the prior Sunday. Did anyone catch this week's? And did he discuss Owen Daniels' catch/non-catch? TIA.

I saw some of it this morning...

I didn't catch it from the beggining but I don't think they discussed it...

But I don't like that segment because He always tries to make bad calls seem right...

I'd like to see him come out and say..."well the official just got this one wrong"......once.....

humbleone

11-16-2006, 01:59 PM

I saw some of it this morning...

I didn't catch it from the beggining but I don't think they discussed it...

But I don't like that segment because He always tries to make bad calls seem right...

I'd like to see him come out and say..."well the official just got this one wrong"......once.....

Very well said!

infantrycak

11-16-2006, 02:53 PM

He did not talk about Daniels. Ironically he did on one of the plays say the on field call was clearly wrong and never should have had to go to a review situation. He also disagreed with a roughing the passer call as well.

real

11-16-2006, 02:59 PM

He did not talk about Daniels. Ironically he did on one of the plays say the on field call was clearly wrong and never should have had to go to a review situation. He also disagreed with a roughing the passer call as well.

You know what...You're right....

He disagreed with that first roughing the passer call...Where the defender was pushed from the back and fell into the QB's ankle....

I remember that because I remember how fast he went to the next call...where the linebacker from the Jets landed with his body weight on the QB...

But I don't really remember him flat out saying that roughing the passer call was wrong...I think he kind of danced around it...I could be wrong because I wasn't paying full attention, but thats what I remember...

infantrycak

11-16-2006, 03:05 PM

But I don't really remember him flat out saying that roughing the passer call was wrong...I think he kind of danced around it...

Well I won't testify to the wording but he described the two key elements (1) not being driven into the contact and (2) forcefully or applying force, some such wording contact below the knee and said neither was met in that case.

The other one was weird because he said the refs were right and wrong. Ball blatantly popped out of a RB's hands while he is full upright and has not stopped. Ref calls it down by contact which Periera said was clearly wrong. That invoked the rule change that down by contact is now reviewable, but only if the film clearly shows possession of the ball. This one bounced into a scrum pile and so couldn't be overturned. He showed one from another game where you could see possession so the bad down by contact ruling was reversed.

real

11-16-2006, 03:14 PM

The other one was weird because he said the refs were right and wrong. Ball blatantly popped out of a RB's hands while he is full upright and has not stopped. Ref calls it down by contact which Periera said was clearly wrong. That invoked the rule change that down by contact is now reviewable, but only if the film clearly shows possession of the ball. This one bounced into a scrum pile and so couldn't be overturned. He showed one from another game where you could see possession so the bad down by contact ruling was reversed.

Yeah I saw that....I thought that was kind of wierd...

But he said that because players heard the whistle they may have stopped going for the ball at the bottom of the pile so therefore if you don't see who has clear possession you can't give who ever comes from under the pile with the ball possession....

Which made perfect since to me...

eriadoc

11-16-2006, 03:40 PM

I saw some of it this morning...

I didn't catch it from the beggining but I don't think they discussed it...

But I don't like that segment because He always tries to make bad calls seem right...

I'd like to see him come out and say..."well the official just got this one wrong"......once.....

Yeah, I don't like the segment much, either, because of what you said and also because it seems like a propaganda segment. I also think they tend to avoid the blatantly wrong calls as much as possible. I was just curious what thye had to say (if anything) about OD's catch. As I figured, they avoided it.

Thanks for the info, everyone.

real

11-16-2006, 03:42 PM

Yeah, I don't like the segment much, either, because of what you said and also because it seems like a propaganda segment. I also think they tend to avoid the blatantly wrong calls as much as possible. I was just curious what thye had to say (if anything) about OD's catch. As I figured, they avoided it.

Thanks for the info, everyone.

Yeah that's what I'm saying...

I find it funny that the O.D "incompletion" wasn't on the segment...

And Rich Eisman(sp) tries to make it seem like he's giving the refs a hard time....puuhhhleeez

SicilianJag

11-16-2006, 03:53 PM

I thought Daniels' play should have been ruled a reception, and it appears that Vic Ketchman from jaguars.com was told by a league offical it should have been overturned as well:

"Bryan from Kernersville, NC: You mentioned that the “Z” crew was sent and there were fewer cameras, but shouldn't all of the games have the same angles to use for replay? I don't mean same amount of cameras, but the same amount of angles?
Vic: High-profile games have more TV cameras than low-profile games, and more cameras mean more angles. Dean Blandino in the league office told me they always try to have at least six cameras at every game. Blandino is in the league's officiating department and he has been an outstanding source of rules information for “Ask Vic” readers. He told me the reason the review guy in the booth on Sunday didn't order a review of the fourth-and-one spot is because he saw the camera angles that were available to him and they didn't provide a view of the ball or the runner's knee, so he knew the play would stand. For PR purposes, however, Blandino said the booth guy should've stopped the game for a review, to let the fans know it was done and the spot could not be overturned. On another note, the ruling of “incomplete pass” late in the game, involving the Texans' Owen Daniels, should've been overturned and ruled a catch and a fumble."

feebleminded

11-16-2006, 04:05 PM

Yeah that's what I'm saying...

I find it funny that the O.D "incompletion" wasn't on the segment...

And Rich Eisman(sp) tries to make it seem like he's giving the refs a hard time....puuhhhleeez

I dont have NFL N, but are the plays that they are talking about from the games that Sunday? I think Kubes said that they had turned that OD play into the league office for review. I dont know how long it takes the league to get back to the teams, but it would seem strange to put a play on this segment that a team has asked to be reviewed, since they may not have had a chance to get back with the teams yet.

Anyway may not be the reason, just a thought

real

11-16-2006, 04:08 PM

I dont have NFL N, but are the plays that they are talking about from the games that Sunday? I think Kubes said that they had turned that OD play into the league office for review. I dont know how long it takes the league to get back to the teams, but it would seem strange to put a play on this segment that a team has asked to be reviewed, since they may not have had a chance to get back with the teams yet.

Anyway may not be the reason, just a thought

Yeah...the plays are from the most recent games played....

I knew they weren't going to have that play on there...Makes em look bad...

The Pencil Neck

11-16-2006, 04:49 PM

Yeah...the plays are from the most recent games played....

I knew they weren't going to have that play on there...Makes em look bad...

Yeah, for the most part, they're going to pick and choose which calls they look at. They're going to prefer controversial ones where they can make a case that the ref was right. And they're going to prefer calls that most people saw that were in big games.

Since none of our games are "big", yet, we're probably not going to get many of our calls on there unless they make the refs look really smrt.

RickDenver

11-16-2006, 08:14 PM

Perrira's job is to protect the refs. What we need is to flood NFL Network with e-mail's demanding this call to be reviewed and explained on the show. Here is the address for NFL Network TotalAccess@nfl.com

threetoedpete

11-16-2006, 08:24 PM

Perrira's job is to protect the refs. What we need is to flood NFL Network with e-mail's demanding this call to be reviewed and explained on the show. Here is the address for NFL Network TotalAccess@nfl.com

I can see how he got the job. If you listen to the guy long enough, he'll have your house, your ride, and making a move on your old lady...and have you thinking it's your fault...you *****. The guy spins fancier than Bill Clinton on the subject of what "is" is. Mind boggeling. As you posted, he is extremly good at what he does.

aj.

11-16-2006, 08:44 PM

I don't think the purpose of the show is for them to confess screw ups - it's to clarify obscure rulings and interpretations. I happen to find that interesting. Does anyone really expect the guy to go on and hang his employees out to dry every week? Teams file their protests to the league office and they get answers back at mid-week. I'm sure the internal league memos are more forthcoming than what they choose to broadcast about themselves to the public - and I'm guessing both sides eventually know when a real mistake is made.

aj.

11-16-2006, 09:03 PM

I don't expect the guy to "hang his employees out to dry" but I do expect officials to be held accountable for their mistakes when they make them.They are. Just not on Wednesday nights on NFL Network.

I think there should be some sort of grading system for officials during the season.
There is. That's how playoff official crews are selected.

infantrycak

11-17-2006, 10:03 AM

];501806']Not once this guy admitted that a call was wrong! NFL network.... I think its time to cancel this segment.

He dances around questions alot. So many questionalble calls on sunday and not a ref make a mistake. . . hrmmmmmm

Nice job of not reading or being correct. Just this week he said two calls were wrong.

I don't think the purpose of the show is for them to confess screw ups - it's to clarify obscure rulings and interpretations. I happen to find that interesting.

Exactly.

eriadoc

11-17-2006, 10:15 AM

I don't think the purpose of the show is for them to confess screw ups - it's to clarify obscure rulings and interpretations. I happen to find that interesting. Does anyone really expect the guy to go on and hang his employees out to dry every week? Teams file their protests to the league office and they get answers back at mid-week. I'm sure the internal league memos are more forthcoming than what they choose to broadcast about themselves to the public - and I'm guessing both sides eventually know when a real mistake is made.

I don't expect him to hang his crew out to dry on TV. However, I figured since it was so obviously a bad call, then was upheld on review, maybe the refs know something we don't. I was curious to see what his justification for the upheld call after review would be.

Since they avoided it altogether, I guess that probably indicates they know it was a screwed up call, otherwise he probably would have explained/defended it.

Edit to clarify - I don't have a problem with refs making bad calls, really - it's a tough job. I have a problem with them reviewing calls on replay and still making a bad call. Use the technology.